Monroe Kathy W, Nichols Michele H, King William D, Tucker Kenya, Tomlinson Randall
Department of Pediatrics, Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 35233, USA.
South Med J. 2003 May;96(5):440-4. doi: 10.1097/01.SMJ.0000054423.65076.75.
The Circulaire nebulizer (C-Neb) is marketed as superior to low-dose albuterol for acute bronchospasm.
This clinical trial design compared clinical and fiscal outcomes of patients treated with C-Neb and high-dose albuterol (HDA). Eligibility criteria included reactive airway disease, age >5 years, and asthma score (AS) of 2 to 10. Patients with odd medical record numbers received HDA, and those with even numbers received C-Neb. Treatment was concluded if AS was 0, peak flow was >70% predicted, or after three treatments.
One hundred eight patients were enrolled: 48 received HDA, 52 received C-Neb, and 8 were excluded. The two groups were comparable by admission rates (G2 = 0.90, P = 0.34), return visit rates (G2 = 0.73, P = 0.39), and final AS (z = 0.59, P = 0.55). Side effects were similar: change in heart rate (t = 1.61, P = 0.11) and mean arterial pressure (t = 1.36, P = 0.17). Charges per treatment, per delivery, and total charges were greater for HDA.
The C-Neb is equally effective, has similar side effects, and requires less time and charges than HDA.
Circulaire雾化器（C-Neb）在市场上被宣传为在治疗急性支气管痉挛方面优于低剂量沙丁胺醇。
本临床试验设计比较了接受C-Neb和高剂量沙丁胺醇（HDA）治疗的患者的临床和财务结果。入选标准包括反应性气道疾病、年龄>5岁以及哮喘评分（AS）为2至10。病历号为奇数的患者接受HDA治疗，病历号为偶数的患者接受C-Neb治疗。如果AS为0、峰值流量>预测值的70%或经过三次治疗，则结束治疗。
共招募了108名患者：48名接受HDA治疗，52名接受C-Neb治疗，8名被排除。两组在入院率（G2 = 0.90，P = 0.34）、复诊率（G2 = 0.73，P = 0.39）和最终AS方面具有可比性（z = 0.59，P = 0.55）。副作用相似：心率变化（t = 1.61，P = 0.11）和平均动脉压变化（t = 1.36，P = 0.17）。HDA的每次治疗费用、每次给药费用和总费用更高。
C-Neb同样有效，副作用相似，与HDA相比所需时间和费用更少。
